The Problem with Gays.

[bobbcat]

Sorry, but homosexuality isn't natural, nothing in nature has been selected to account for it

Not natural to you, not natural to me. There are many instances of homosexual activity in the animal world. I suggest you do some research on it.

... by the same token there are people out there who believe pedophilia is natural and that pedophiles cannot be cured and thus should be locked up for life, neither has been proven to be "natural," but both pedophiles and homosexuals sure as hell do like doing what they doing which means an element of choice is involved

Comparing homosexuality to pedophilia is specious. Involving children in any sort of sexual activity, regardless of sexual orientation is a true example of an abberation. I dare to say that sexual activity involving children is more common among straight people.

 

[CurveLight]

Sorry, but homosexuality isn't natural, nothing in nature has been selected to account for it

Not natural to you, not natural to me. There are many instances of homosexual activity in the animal world. I suggest you do some research on it.

... by the same token there are people out there who believe pedophilia is natural and that pedophiles cannot be cured and thus should be locked up for life, neither has been proven to be "natural," but both pedophiles and homosexuals sure as hell do like doing what they doing which means an element of choice is involved

Comparing homosexuality to pedophilia is specious. Involving children in any sort of sexual activity, regardless of sexual orientation is a true example of an abberation. I dare to say that sexual activity involving children is more common among straight people.

Pedophilia has to be brought up because bigots are not honest people.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Marriage is not a Right or a Privilege. It is a personal relationship with no universal definition. The Constitution guarantees equal rights. You know this. You don't give a ****.

There is *NOTHING* in the Constitution that makes special provisions for people based on their sexual lifestyles. Polygamists can't marry as many people as they like and gays cannot marry people of the same sex and there is nothing in the Constitution that says their sexual lifestyles should be accommodated as equal rights, so come up with a better argument.

If to men want to screw each other thats their choice, but the government is not entitled to give them special accommodation for it.

 

[bobbcat]

the government is not entitled to give them special accommodation for it.

As if this is what they are asking for, which is not the case. They are simply asking for equality, you know, to be able to sit anywhere on the bus, not to have to drink out of that fountain only, etc. IOW, not 'separate but equal' but equal in the eyes of the law.

 

[dilloduck]

the government is not entitled to give them special accommodation for it.

As if this is what they are asking for, which is not the case. They are simply asking for equality, you know, to be able to sit anywhere on the bus, not to have to drink out of that fountain only, etc. IOW, not 'separate but equal' but equal in the eyes of the law.

no--they want to change the meaning of a word

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Not natural to you, not natural to me.

And pedophiles think screwing children is natural to them, but hey, we should just live and let die just because they feel its natural, right?

There are many instances of homosexual activity in the animal world. I suggest you do some research on it.

Homosexuality, even in the animals world is an aberration and a rarity itself. Plus to take this dumb argument of yours much farther, animals do a hell of a lot of other things thate even homosexuals wouldn't consider as natural, such as incest, cannibalism and eating their feces, you pro-homosexuals need to quit picking choosing selectively what is natural for you from the animal world whenever it suits you.

Comparing homosexuality to pedophilia is specious. Involving children in any sort of sexual activity, regardless of sexual orientation is a true example of an abberation. I dare to say that sexual activity involving children is more common among straight people.

Dork, whether pedophilia is more common amongst heterosexuals or homosexuals is irrelevant, the point is that neither homosexuality nor pedophilia is natural and both sexual activities are choices. With the exception of NAMBLA, nobody is arguing for special accommodations for pedophiles the same way they argue for homosexuals even though the same crowds below both are natural and unchangeable.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

the government is not entitled to give them special accommodation for it.

As if this is what they are asking for, which is not the case. They are simply asking for equality, you know, to be able to sit anywhere on the bus, not to have to drink out of that fountain only, etc. IOW, not 'separate but equal' but equal in the eyes of the law.

They are too asking for special accommodation based on the fact that they are gay, but in reality all Americans are afforded the privilege to get a marriage license, gays just want the requirements and standards changed specially for them. The same rules apply for all people, they just can't have it there way.

 

[rdean]

That isn't an anxiety disorder. I work with mentally ill people, and not agreeing with something, even strongly, isn't a form of mental illness. So tell me, what exact anxiety disorder does he or she suffer from ? What symptoms can you check off of the DSM for the OP ?

And phobias and anxiety disorders are two entirely different things. I'm sure the OP can live a normal functional life even though they disagree with homosexuality, and disagreement with homosexuality isn't homophobia. It's just disagreeing with it.

Obvious ? You mean your hypocrisy and fanaticism ? You're as fanatical as the OP. I think you're both idiots.

No, it's you who's the idiot. Mega idiot. Comparing people to murderers and thieves and suggesting they are a danger to children goes "way beyond" a "simple disagreement" fool.

And look at what he says, "I cannot watch TV for a half hour without seeing SEVERAL gay people/Gay promoting material on my screen."

So do YOU see gay people every 20 minutes? So is he going to "avoid" watching TV?

And then bringing up straight marriage? What is that about? Gays are like 3 to 5% of the entire population. What does that have to do with straight marriage? This is someone who is "ranting" from fear and terror. What could they be working themselves up for? What might they do? What are they trying to get others to do?

You can have a mental illness and not be completely dysfunctional. Gawd, do I have to explain everything?

===================================

Mental Health America: Phobias

These disorders cause you to feel anxious most of the time, making some everyday situations so uncomfortable that you may avoid them entirely. (maybe TV?)

Uh, quote me where I said that. Personally I could careless about gay people. They don't impact me in any way shape or form.

BTW Everyone has phobias and everyone avoids their phobias, that's a natural response to phobias.

I don't like deep water and heights, so I avoid them. Doesn't mean I have an anxiety disorder. Just means I don't care for either one and have a phobia about them.

Oh I see. So that means your marriage is in trouble, you probably murder people and you obviously are a threat to children.

Do you see how ludicrous that is? Doesn't make any sense. It's delusion fueled by fear. If that isn't "mental illness", then I don't know what is.

 

[rdean]

I must say to the pro-homosexual crowd, where in the United States Constitution is there anything about gays having rights or should I say people having special rights based upon their sexual aberrations? Once again, marriage is not a right, it is a privilege and just like a drivers' licence is a privilege there are certain things you must do to obtain it, if you don't meet the standard you do not get a licence, the law nor do the standards change to give you a licence. Now, what is so hard about this that you pro-homosexuals cannot understand?

So how many gays aren't allowed to get a drivers license?

Fool.

 

[bobbcat]

Charlie Bass, you have illustrated the point made by the following quote: "Never argue with an idiot; you'll be dragged down and beaten with experience." *she predicts that dear Charlie will call her the 'idiot'*

I will pursue this conversation with you no longer.

 

[Bass v 2.0]

I must say to the pro-homosexual crowd, where in the United States Constitution is there anything about gays having rights or should I say people having special rights based upon their sexual aberrations? Once again, marriage is not a right, it is a privilege and just like a drivers' licence is a privilege there are certain things you must do to obtain it, if you don't meet the standard you do not get a licence, the law nor do the standards change to give you a licence. Now, what is so hard about this that you pro-homosexuals cannot understand?

So how many gays aren't allowed to get a drivers license?

Fool.

When you got your driver's licence[I'm assuming you have one already] did the DMV change the rules for based on something personal in your life? Did you not have the pass the driver's test like everyone else and meet the same requirements?

 

[rdean]

Being gay is a fad. It's the popular thing to do, that's why so many kids are claiming to be gay.

Fad? Are you crazy?

When you beat off, if you're a guy and you think of Angelina, you're straight, if you think of Brad, you're gay. If you think of both, THEN you can choose. But I can't relate to that. But I don't compare those people to murderers either.

But a "popular" thing to do? That's laughable. Believe me, if you are "straight" another guys junk is NOT attractive. If it is, you might want to reconsider your orientation.

Where has all the common sense gone?

 

[Bass v 2.0]

Charlie Bass, you have illustrated the point made by the following quote: "Never argue with an idiot; you'll be dragged down and beaten with experience." *she predicts that dear Charlie will call her the 'idiot'*

I will pursue this conversation with you no longer.

You just ran out of arguments to make because all of yours got refuted, now you resort to personal attacks? Well, if thats the case the feeling is mutual.

 

[Luissa]

Dude, you are bigot!
Are you Bass's wife?

What, exactly, is wrong with what he said?

You wanna go **** another woman, go for it. Just don't expect any special treatment for it, and don't think you're entitled to the same benefits as husbands and wives (not husbands, and husbands, or wives and wives - HUSBANDS AND WIVES).

So you are alright with denying a group of people a right due to their beliefs? The supreme court has already established marriage is a right, not a privilage.

 

[rdean]

the government is not entitled to give them special accommodation for it.

As if this is what they are asking for, which is not the case. They are simply asking for equality, you know, to be able to sit anywhere on the bus, not to have to drink out of that fountain only, etc. IOW, not 'separate but equal' but equal in the eyes of the law.

no--they want to change the meaning of a word

They want to change the meaning of a word. Could any phrase sound more stupid? They want to change the meaning of a word. It's a ******* WORD!

 

[rdean]

Not natural to you, not natural to me.

And pedophiles think screwing children is natural to them, but hey, we should just live and let die just because they feel its natural, right?

There are many instances of homosexual activity in the animal world. I suggest you do some research on it.

Homosexuality, even in the animals world is an aberration and a rarity itself. Plus to take this dumb argument of yours much farther, animals do a hell of a lot of other things thate even homosexuals wouldn't consider as natural, such as incest, cannibalism and eating their feces, you pro-homosexuals need to quit picking choosing selectively what is natural for you from the animal world whenever it suits you.

Comparing homosexuality to pedophilia is specious. Involving children in any sort of sexual activity, regardless of sexual orientation is a true example of an abberation. I dare to say that sexual activity involving children is more common among straight people.

Dork, whether pedophilia is more common amongst heterosexuals or homosexuals is irrelevant, the point is that neither homosexuality nor pedophilia is natural and both sexual activities are choices. With the exception of NAMBLA, nobody is arguing for special accommodations for pedophiles the same way they argue for homosexuals even though the same crowds below both are natural and unchangeable.

When you get screwed in the butt, it's your "choice". You didn't have to let it happen. Are you a "child"?

 

[Luissa]

I could careless about gay people. Doesn't bother me one bit. I can understand gay people wanting the same civil protections as regular couples.

In that case, however, if they want the same protections as "regular couples", then perhaps they need to form "regular couples", rather than expecting protections to extend to the irregular.

Why should they?

 

[rdean]

I must say to the pro-homosexual crowd, where in the United States Constitution is there anything about gays having rights or should I say people having special rights based upon their sexual aberrations? Once again, marriage is not a right, it is a privilege and just like a drivers' licence is a privilege there are certain things you must do to obtain it, if you don't meet the standard you do not get a licence, the law nor do the standards change to give you a licence. Now, what is so hard about this that you pro-homosexuals cannot understand?

So how many gays aren't allowed to get a drivers license?

Fool.

When you got your driver's licence[I'm assuming you have one already] did the DMV change the rules for based on something personal in your life? Did you not have the pass the driver's test like everyone else and meet the same requirements?

So driver's license requirement was "ordained by Casper the Friendly Gawd"?
Everything you say makes your look more stupid.

 

[Dis]

I could careless about gay people. Doesn't bother me one bit. I can understand gay people wanting the same civil protections as regular couples.

In that case, however, if they want the same protections as "regular couples", then perhaps they need to form "regular couples", rather than expecting protections to extend to the irregular.

Why should they?

Because they want the same protections as "regular couples" - duh?! Even THEY use the words "regular couples" when making their demands - they KNOW the truth..

 

[dilloduck]

As if this is what they are asking for, which is not the case. They are simply asking for equality, you know, to be able to sit anywhere on the bus, not to have to drink out of that fountain only, etc. IOW, not 'separate but equal' but equal in the eyes of the law.

no--they want to change the meaning of a word

They want to change the meaning of a word. Could any phrase sound more stupid? They want to change the meaning of a word. It's a ******* WORD!

and it's a descriptive word. Are gays unable to find a word that describes their committed relationships ?